Boy, that makes you wonder.
Also fun: your own household furnishings or a toddler with a gun were always a greater danger to you than terrorism, speaking in terms of probabilities.
You are a horrible parent if you have a gun anywhere near your toddler.
You’re not wrong, but guns are a civic religion here in the US. There are lots and lots and lots of guns that are easily accessible by toddlers.
Aren’t guns supposed to be to fight tyrannical governments or something in the US? Where is that? I’ve been told by Americans that all the gun deaths were worth it in the case of what is currently happening there
Yeah, that’s all just bullshit. A thought-terminating cliche.
Here’s a tip, watch your kids, lol.
Don’t look at me. I purposely didn’t have kids. Kids are awful.
While true, that’s not relevant, good parents and non-parents can also get killed by toddlers with guns.
You are a horrible parent if you have a gun
anywhere near your toddler.OK, so just call the police if somebody is in your house trying to murder you… Yea that makes sense… Hold on burglar, I’m on the phone with the cops, you just stay there until they get here… Your comment lacks any kind of common sense.
It you own a gun and have a kid your kid is way more likely to shoot itself or you than a home invader trying to murder you. Like way more.
Yea, if you are not a safe gun owner. Do you not know what a gun safe is? Keys can be hidden.
That’s not how statistics work.
Most people are stupid. That is why the stats are so high, all lax with guns. Like laying them around against the wall for example. Then their 10 year old shoots somebody. But real gun owners make sure they are in a safe place.
Do you just live in constant fear of statistically unlikely occurrences? Are you a conservative by chance?
Looks like you never lived in the ghetto. Are you just a simple Caucasian.
Who the hell says caucasian anymore? And nobody calls it the ghetto anymore, like what in the boomer is this comment?
Now you are making fun of older people, how sad are you…
Just make sure you have your baseball bat, nunchucks, throwing stars or whatever mall ninja vigilante weapon you care to imagine. These will be far more accessible than the recommended gun safe and separately stored ammo.
LOLOL
You are a horrible parent if you have a gun anywhere
Could have stopped there.
What are you going to stop a burglar with? Hugs??? That was a very idiotic thing to say. Do you not know how the world works? Just let the burglar attack you or your family until the cops get there…
If a bugler can get by my dogs without getting mauled to death, or my military training, god bless them.
Also, most robberies in Canada are done without firearms. Since… You know… They’re not exactly common here.
Also if you own a gun just to prevent imaginary robberies and dream of being able to shoot and kill someone, you might want to seek professional help. Most people don’t want to kill someone.
Burglars also have guns that can easily shoot your dog in the US. You are not even thinking about the US. I knew there was no way in hell you live in the USA with that comment. Robberies happen, this isn’t imaginary. You best be thankful you never lived in a dangerous neighbourhood. Nobody is actually wanting to kill a burglar. It’s was disgusting for you to even suggest that. Guns don’t always instantly kill people.
You are many orders of magnitude more likely to kill yourself or a loved one with a gun in the home than you are to stop an attempted home invasion with a gun. The statistics aren’t remotely ambiguous, you are much much much more likely to get shot when you have a gun in your home.
Again, you have never heard of a gun safe have you? Keep living in your safe little neighbourhood.
You best be thankful you never lived in a dangerous neighbourhood.
Then you didn’t know where I lived when I went to school in Toronto. Kitty-Corner from me was a pay by hour hotel. Lots of hookers, escorts, pimps, drugs, etc.
They just didn’t have guns. Because they’re hard to come by in Canada and don’t come with the same dick stroking reputation as it does in the States. No one cares about guns here because our country doesn’t masturbate over the idea of having them.
I’ve known multiple drug dealers in my life. None of them owned guns.
Perhaps you should self reflect that this problem you have with needing to “protect” your family with killing machines because other people have such easy access to those same killing machines is purely an America problem, not a global problem.
I hope you never use those guns on your family. Because statistically you are.
There is no way in hell you could compare drug dealers in Canada to ones in The United States. Real drug dealers have guns. Those drug dealers you have seen in Canada are nothing. Oh, look I am going to protect all my stash with a knife… Nope! And you can actually be a safe gun owner.
So war against toddlers now?
Opens Twitter
#GasTheTykes
Closes Twitter
I imagine that our euphemistically-named ‘defense contractors’ would be all for it.
A do think that a case can be made that toddlers are terrorists. I think the Israelis have a whole preso on that someplace, let me look.
It was never about antiterrorism; it’s all about controlling the population.
The Cons DID call themselves domestic terrorists…
deleted by creator
No, but they do use it to target all sorts of other things via Parallel Construction.
Now that Trump has defined anyone against fascism as being a terrorist, the path ahead is clear.
Shocking the government is using this gross privacy violation for reasons other than stated, like opponents said at the time it would.
Terrorism is mostly a scam to justify a lot of things sane and informed citizens would never support.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Ben Franklin
He also had slaves but people really don’t talk about that… He literally was a hypocrite with that freedom and liberty shit.
Well… You know except for the fact that he started one of the first abolitionist movements in the United States after realizing slavery was morally reprehensible and indefensible later in life especially after the revolutionary war.
But who cares about history and facts.
You can try to spin it how ever you want, he still owned slaves. But, you just ignored that fact.
“But who cares about history and facts.”
That fucker literally benefitted from the slave trade.
No one is denying that Franklin owned slaves. That is a historical fact, and I never claimed otherwise.
The problem is that your position is not defensible because it requires pretending the rest of his life never happened. Franklin freed the people he enslaved, became president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, and petitioned Congress to take action against slavery. Those are documented historical facts.
If your argument is that anyone who ever participated in an immoral institution can never later become a genuine reformer, then you’ve adopted an absurd standard that would erase countless people who recognized their wrongdoing and spent the rest of their lives trying to correct it.
You keep repeating that Franklin benefited from slavery as though it somehow refutes the fact that he became one of America’s earliest and most influential abolitionists. It doesn’t. Those facts are not contradictory. They are precisely what makes his transformation historically significant.
You accuse others of ignoring history while selectively discarding every fact that undermines your conclusion. That is not an argument. It is just historical cherry-picking.
But he did something we know think is wrong! So he is evil!
This is live on easy mode. Imagine living like that.
The point was, he had them and he totally ignored the comment and didn’t acknowledge it. Just like some Fox news guest would.
I acknowledged absolutely everything in my comment jackass. I acknowledge that Ben Franklin own slaves. I acknowledged that it is morally reprehensible for anyone to own slaves at any point in time.
What else would you like me to acknowledge sir?
You literally did ignore it until now, lol, that was why I was repeating it.
" You accuse others of ignoring history while selectively discarding every fact that undermines your conclusion."
There was no accusation, it was all you ignoring it, there were no others. You actually did it. Just say he had slaves then we could have moved on from there.
You’re not reading or understanding anything that I’m saying to you.
The fact that Ben Franklin owns slaves is objective verifiable fact.
There is no need for me to acknowledge that since I’m not contesting that point in any way.
Moreover, I did acknowledge it in my next comment.
Just take your bitch slap and move on.
In fact, I’d be willing to bet you didn’t even know he was an abolitionist to start with.
You are not understanding, since you didn’t first acknowledge and immediately tried to defend him, we won’t have your hissy fit you are throwing. Your hero sucks. In fact, you would probably suck him off and he would bitch slap you for using too much teeth.
In the 60s, the CIA proposed multiple false flag attacks and operations on Cuba to former President JFK that would be considered borderline terrorism today. Much in the same way that Trump is launching an invasion in Iran and Putin in Ukraine. Thankfully Kennedy did decline most of their proposals because he thought they crossed the line though he did grant them permission to do some basic things. Still not good he let them intervene at all though that’s not the worst thing the CIA has done.
JFK replaced the chairman of the joint chiefs (Lemnitzer) for bringing that BS domestic terrorism (operation North Woods) to his desk. That was a kindness really, the guy should have been put in jail. Lemnitzer also really wanted to nuke Cuba too. He was a fascist idiot.
Unfortunately there are still fascist idiots in the American government right now so not much has changed! But yeah glad they did not Nuke Cuba. That would have been bad.
Side note-Do you think that the CIA killed Kennedy?
Kennedy pressured Ben-Gurion to allow inspections of their nuclear facilities, and JFK was pressuring congress to declare AIPAC a foriegn lobbyist oragnization. Ben-Gurion stepped down instead, and Kennedy got assassinated so the effort to reclassify AIPAC evaporated. Israel were the biggest winners in JFK’s assassination by a large margin, and assassination was what they did as part of their normal politics. While some CIa agents were on the scene of JFK’s murder, for some reason no one knows what they were doing there. So whoever did it had to have access to the CIA, which rules out the Russians and the mafia. It was the military industrial complex, or Israel. Theres no way Oswald acted alone either.
There’s a lot of coincidences if they didn’t.
I like the theory of an accidental misfire from a secret service agent.
It makes the most sense if the entire thesis of JFK’s death is that even hordes of loyal secret service agents with guns pose a risk to the president.
The CIA had plans to kill fidel castro with clam bombs. They aren’t serious people just well funded and dangerous. I think they had Oswald killed to cover up the Secret Service’s embarrassing accident because if Oswald had testified he didn’t shoot all the rounds the obvious question would be aired.
I dunno I think they may have been involved. But maybe they looked the other way. I think Kennedy knew about aliens and wanted to tell the world. But that is my tin foil hat, lol.
They could at least stage a false flag and pretend like any of it worked. Its all a big evil clownshow run with our money.
Tax strike
If you define your own citizens as terrorists then, yes, they have.
You are right!
Let’s say they did stop an event, they have no reason to actually publicise it. Worst case, they publicise a technique, best case, no one believes them anyway.
Youre asking them to prove a negative.
They would 100% charge people with criminal conspiracy to commit terrorism if they had the evidence. There are plenty of those charges too, just from actual police. They fucking just charged antifa protestors with it. Our government is just fucking stupid, ugh.
Parallel construction means they don’t need to use the original evidence. Your administration is stupid, but not everyone doing the work is.
To be clear, I’m not pro-dragnet-survelliance, it has massive downsides, I’m just pointing out that any upside (if it exists at all) is entirely hidden from everyone else.
They didn’t, there is no say. Why would they say a technique?? They could just say they actually stopped somebody without saying how, buuuuuuut they didn’t stop anybody anyway.
So, they say “We stopped this event, can’t say how”, and you’d just believe that?
If it was a top secret way, yea. They are tight lipped. Remember, they just said they threw Bin Laden’s body in the ocean and that was that.
They are tight lipped.
Lol not anymore they’re not
Oh yea, UFO stuff and such. That is a good point. Well, now it is all wacky isn’t it…
Of course, because that was never its real purpose.
This article is from 2015.
This article is still true.
What has happened since then?
No but now you can sociopath in the government. Not everybody gets to sociopath in the government. Edit: National Sociopath Agency
Section 702 (which is a BFD and allows everything the government report this article is based on says is an overreach) was NOT renewed June 12
It was not renewed because Congress knows Trump will turn it on us (probably because they know he is using it against them already)
No it doesn’t. It’s a government program that’s designed to funnel money and that’s all.
It was designed for control
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
